MANOHAR DEKA Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE 'petitioner who is presently working as Treasury Officer at Abhayapuri Sub -treasury was transferred as Treasury Officer of Kamrup Treasury vice the respondent No. 4 who was transferred as Finance and Accounts Officer in the office of the Director, Pension, Assam. This was so done by a notification dated 28.1.2004. Apart from the petitioner and the respondent No. 4 and four other officers were also transferred from one place to another having chain reaction.

(2.) PURSUANT to the said order of transfer, the petitioner was released from Abhayapuri office with effect from 30.1.2004 enabling him to join duty as Treasury Officer, Kamrup Treasury. By a notification dated 12.2.2004 stated to be in partial modification of the earlier notification dated 28.1.2004, the transfer of the respondent No. 4 was stayed upto 31.3.2004 and the petitioner was directed to continue as Treasury Officer, Abhayapuri sub -treasury till 31.3.2004. This was followed by the impugned notification dated 25.3.2004 altogether cancelling the earlier notification dated 28.1.2004. By yet another notification dated 10.3.2004, another officer was transferred and posted to the place where the respondent No. 4 was earlier transfer and posted.

(3.) THE office respondents although have not filed any affidavit, produced records in support of the impugned order. Mr. K.N. Choudhury, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. A.J. Atia submitted that after ordering transfer of the petitioner form Abhayapuri to Guwahati in a routine manner, there could not have any occasion to stay the transfer order and then to cancel the same. According to Mr. Choudhury, the entire action on the part of the official respondents is to show favour to the respondent No. 4. Mr. B. Choudhury, learned Government advocate, Assam on the other hand submitted that the presence of the respondent No. 4 in Guwahati is Required in view of entrusting of election duties to him and also in connection with some important works. He submitted that the petitioner cannot claim his transfer and posting to a particular place and it is within the competence and jurisdiction of the State Government to transfer its officers on evaluation of the exigencies. Mr. G.C. Phukan, while adopting the submissions made by Mr. B. Choudhury, learned Government advocate produced document to suggest that the presence of the respondent No. 4 is required in connection with investigation of a CBI case.